Madhya Pradesh Court February 2013 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Sanjay Kumar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2013
M.Cr.C.No.574/2013 07.02.2013 Shri Ganga Prasad Patel, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Punit Shroti, learned PL for the respondent-State. Heard. Learned PL submits that he is under receipt of the case diary. On behalf of the applicant, this petition is preferred under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.for grant of anticipatory bail as he is under apprehension of his arrest in connection of Crime No.422/2012, registered at Police Station Panagar, District Jabalpur for the offence under Sections 379 of IPC and Section 136 of the Electricity Act 2003. In the couRs.of arguments on merits of the petition, in response of some query of the court based on the situation of the case, applicant's counsel seeks permission to withdraw this petition as not pressed with further appropriate direction to the trial court to that after surrendering by the applicant, if any application for grant of bail is filed on his behalf then the same be considered and decided by the concerning court on its own merits on...
Smt.Uma Rani Patel Vs. Praveen Krishna
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2013
1 Conc.No.1681/2012 Smt.Uma Rani Patel Praveen Krishna & others 7.2.2013 Shri Anurag Sahu, Counsel for petitioner. Shri Vijay Pandey, Dy.AG for State. Shri S.M.Lal, Counsel for respondent No.5. Shri Vivek Rusia, Counsel for respondent No.6. On 12.10.2012, we directed thus:- Shri Anurag Sahu, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Vijay Pandey, Deputy Advocate General for the State. Considering the controveRs.involved in this case, we direct to Shri Vijay Pandey to seek instructions from the respondent no.1, in respect of the grievance raised by the petitioner in this petition. Petitioner to serve two sets of the petition to Shri Vijay Pandey, Dy. Advocate General, within three working days against acknowledgment. Be listed after two weeks. Today, counsel for respondents No.5 and 6 are present and they are seeking time to file reply in the matter. We enquired from them why they are present. It is stated by Shri Rusia that they have received a letter from the Chief Medical and Health Officer,...
M/S Ashok Kumar and Company Vs. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR Criminal Revision No.2143/2012 M/s Ashok Kumar & Company Vs. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti and another --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Gupta. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name of counsel for the parties: Shri Ashish Sinha, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the respondent No.2/State. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on 7th day of February, 2013) The applicant/firm was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 6 and 31 read with Section 48 of Krishi Upaj Mandi, Adhiniyam and sentenced with fine of `500/- vide judgment dated 29.11.2011 passed by the learned J . M. .F C. (Ku. Vineeta Bhatnagar), Sehore in criminal case No.2070/10. In criminal appe...
Shri 1008 Choudhary Digambar JaIn Mandir Trust Chhatarpur Near City Ko ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2013
1 W.P.No.18169/2012 7.2.2013 Shri R.P.Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel with Shri P.K.Sahu, for the petitioner. Shri Anubhav Jain, learned counsel for the respondents. Challenging the order dated 31.1.2012 passed by the Collector/ Registrar, Public Trust, Chhatarpur and the order dated 15.5.2012 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer and the delegated authority exercising the powers of Registrar, Public Trust, Chhatarpur, under the M.P.Public Trust Act, 1951, petitioner has filed this writ petition. Respondent No.1 Shri Komal Chand Jain filed an application for registration of Trust with regard to certain property situated in Chhatarpur which forms Jain Temple. An application submitted by Shri Komal Chand Jain was to the effect that a trust be registered in the name of Shri Digambar Jain Neminath Jinalaya Trust, Chhatarpur. It seems that the application was submitted to the Sub Divisional Officer to whom the power of Registrar of Trust was delegated by the Collector and vide order dated 19...
M/S Shastri Construction Company Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2013
Writ Petition No.21946/2012 7.2.2013 Shri Brindavan Tiwari, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, Government Advocate, for the State. The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: (I) That the respondents may kindly be directed to finalize the bills of petitioner- firm without insisting for production of royalty receipt. (II) That the respondents be further directed not to recover and not to insist the petitioner-firm to produce royalty certificate and in case any amount is recovered, the same be refunded to the petitioner-firm. The respondents be also directed to finalize the bills with interest @ 18% per annum. (III) That the other reliefs doing justice including cost be ordered. The learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the controveRs.involved in this case is squarely covered by an order of this Court in W.P.No.1361/09 M/s Chandrama Construction Company v. M.P.Rajya Krishi Vipran Sangh in which the learned Single Judge of this Court considering the contro...
R.N. Tandan and Sons Vs. Sanghi Finance and Investment Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-2013
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR CIVIL REVISION No.397/2012 R.N. Tandon & sons Vs. Sanghi Finance & Investment Ltd. ____________________________________________________________ Present : Honble Shri Justice K.K. Trivedi ____________________________________________________________ Shri V.R. Rao, learned senior Counsel assisted by Shri S. Rao, learned Counsel for the applicant. Shri V.K. Jain and Shri Vivek Rusia, learned Counsel for the respondent. ____________________________________________________________ ORDER (06.02.2013) This revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been filed against the order dated 31.01.2011 passed in Execution Case No.18/2005 by the IV Additional District Judge, Jabalpur, by which the objection filed by the applicant with respect to the maintainability of the execution case and passing of the award without making reference to the same to the Collector of Stamps was negatived by the Executing Court. It is contended that the valid o...
Hari Om Vs. Bhagwan Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-2013
Writ Petition No :5619. / 2011 Hari Om versus Bhagwan Singh and others 06.02.2013. Shri T.S.Ruprah, Senior Advocate, with Shri Harpreet Ruprah for the petitioner. Shri Ashok Agrawal for respondent No.1. Challenging the concurrent orders passed by the trial court and the appellate court in rejecting an application for temporary injunction filed by the petitioner under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, this application has been filed. Respondents 1 and 2 have filed the suit for declaration and injunction against the petitioner. It is the case of respondents 1 and 2 that they have purchased the suit property from the wife of the petitioner one Smt. Anita, who was in possession. It is stated that as the petitioner is interfering with possession of the plaintiffs the suit was filed, the suit is pending adjudication and in the suit an application for temporary injunction having been rejected, this writ petition is filed. It is the case of the petitioner that he was marri...
Narendra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-2013
1 Cr.R.No.901/2012. 6.2.2013 . Shri Prashant Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Alok Tapikar, learned P.L.for the respondent/ State. Heard on the question of admission. The applicant/accused has preferred this revision under Section 397/401 of Cr. P.C.being aggrieved by the order dated 17.4.2012, passed by the Additional Session Judge, Sagar in S.T.No.69/2012, whereby the charge of Section 306 of IPC has been framed against the applicant. The facts giving rise to this revision in short are that on 23.10.2011 one Neelam Goswami has given a report in writing at P.S.Sanodha contending that the applicant Narendra Sahu on the point of the knife has taken away his sister. Subsequent to it she could not be traced out. On 25.10.2011 one Arvind Giri has given the intimation to Police that early in the morning at about 6.00 am he went to take bath at some well where he saw the dead body of deceased Rani Goswami, on which a merg intimation was registered. In its inquiry prima-facie it...
Aditya Manware Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-2013
Criminal Revision No.88 o06. 02.2013 Shri L.S.Singh, learned counsel for the applicants. Smt. Nirmala Nayak, learned Govt. Adv.for respondent -State. Head on the question of admission. On behalf of the applicants accused this revision is preferred being aggrieved by the order dated 4.1.2013, (Ann. A-1).passed by the Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in S.T.No.807/2012, whereby charge of Section 498-A/34 of IPC has been framed against each of the applicants while in addition to it, the charge of Section 377 of IPC was additionally framed against the applicant no.1, Aditya Manware. Initially by referring the papers placed on record alongwith the impugned order the case was argued at length by the applicants' counsel for quashment of the aforesaid charges levelled against the applicants but in view of the averments of the FIR and other papers placed on record, on making some query from counsel that in such available circumstances of the case, how the impugned charges framed could be ...
Maharshi Mahesh Yogi Vedic Vishwavidhyalaya Vs. National Council for T ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-06-2013
1 W.P.No.11152/2012 Maharishi Mahesh Yogi Vedic National Council for Teacher Vishwavidyalaya Education 6.2.2013 Shri M.S.Bhatti, Counsel for petitioner. Shri K.K.Singh, Counsel for respondent. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that on 22.1.2013, WRC have decided the matter in favour of the petitioner and granted recognition. It is further submitted by Shri Bhatti that though recognition has been granted, but name of petitioner institution is not appearing in the website. On raising such contention, Shri K.K.Singh, learned counsel for respondent submits that petitioner is having copy of the minutes dated 22.1.2013 and consequential order is yet to be issued and while issuing consequential order, consequences shall follow and in case, recognition order is issued in favour of the petitioner, its name shall appear in the website. In view of aforesaid, no further order is required. This petition is finally disposed of, with no order as to costs. C.C.as per rules. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) ...
- ‹ Prev
- 107
- 108
- 109
- 110
- 111
- 113
- 114
- 115
- 116
- 117
- Next ›
- Last »